Chaotic Enby is currently experiencing mental health issues, which may affect their Wikipedia editing in various ways. They may have difficulty with:
altered perception when making editorial judgements, determining consensus, or reading Wikipedia discussions addressed to them;
reduced availability on Wikipedia during times when they experience issues;
limited capacity to respond to other Wikipedians via talk page or email messages in a timely fashion, to participate in conflict resolution, or to complete their usual workload of Wikipedia tasks.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kamala (elephant) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
You made some edits to WP:NTK about three months ago. Could you take a look at my recent edits, which were reverted for no apparent reason? They all seemed reasonable to me, unless I am really misunderstanding something. 103.115.23.42 (talk) 01:44, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Your edits look pretty good, although some were pretty major changes. The editor who reverted you only said "discuss", so the best thing would be to get consensus on the talk page (WP:BRD). This page also has a history of sockpuppetry, so that may be why some editors are unusually wary about changes made there. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 09:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Zolisa Memani, I'm not Chaotic Enby, but I'm a little worried you might be starting on the wrong foot here. Wikipedia doesn't have "profiles" like social media. There are userpages, but their goal is to just give a little friendly information about yourself, on the side as it were. Our main goal here is improving the encyclopedia, directly, or behind the scenes. If you're looking for somewhere to start editing, I'd suggest going to our task centre or your homepage. If you're ambitious, you can even draft an article based on reliable sources on a topic that meets our "notability" (inclusion) guidelines and submit for review.
Hi! @Cremastra gave you a very good summary – if you want to start with writing a short introduction on your user page, that's fine, but the goal of Wikipedia is the encyclopedia part! Please note that user pages are also pretty different from encyclopedia pages: you can see the difference between User:Jimbo Wales and Jimmy Wales, for instance. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:32, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
AI-generated drafts/articles
Hi! What might be the proper protocol for handling articles that pass through AfC but are AI-generated? I'm specifically looking at a trail of med articles that look good but aren't -- all by the same author. See 2-Aminoadipic-2-oxoadipic aciduria, for example, which (understandably) passed through AfC. Per the Wiki GPTzero tool, this has a 99.8% AI score. I'm of course thinking about this article and ones like it, but I'm also curious how to handle stuff like this moving forward. Also, feel free to point me somewhere else. :) Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 07:36, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Significa liberdade Thanks a lot for the question! Especially with medical articles, the best bet should be to double-check if the content matches the citations if you can, or ask more specialized editors at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine. If all of these articles were created by the same person, it could be good to send them a human-written message on their talk page to explain them that this isn't the right way to go, and tell them about WP:MEDRS. If they continue after that, ANI and/or a mainspace pblock might be needed, as this is clearly disruptive.More generally, if you encounter editors repeatedly adding AI-generated articles, the best is to warn them and firmly explain them that this is not recommended, and take further action if they continue (or have already been warned before). Regarding the articles themselves: if notability is there and they passed through AfC/were already moved from draftspace, there isn't much more to do than slap a few maintenance tags and/or cleanup anything that seems suspicious.(Also noting that "completely AI-generated" is not an actual CSD criterion, and, with the latitude allowed in draftspace, Draft:Catecholaminergic Neurodysregulation Syndrome probably shouldn't have been deleted. Not a big deal, but good to know for the future!) Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:48, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your quick reply! Given the content is highly specialized, I do not feel confident being able to go through them. As such, I have posted a request for review at WP Medicine.
Hi again! I have a quick question/concern regarding the Wiki GPTzero tool, specifically looking at the article Bile acid synthesis disorders. When the current page is run through Wiki GPTzero tool, I'm told the AI-gen score is 99.8%. However, when running a historical version of the article (without any changes to the actual text except the addition of a maintenance tag), I'm told the AI-score is 1.7%. Do you know what might be causing this? Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 01:18, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wishing you a Merry Christmas filled with love and joy, a Happy Holiday season surrounded by warmth and laughter, and a New Year brimming with hope, happiness, and success! 🎄🎉✨ Baqi:) (talk) 10:44, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you believe it guys? Christmas, just a week away!
– 🌻 Hilst (talk | contribs) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Do you know if the copyvio was ever taken care of?
A bit of a complicated situation, I've asked on WP:DISCORD if someone better-versed in copyvio than myself could double-check it. It's tricky, because the page can't be WP:G5 as it was created before the accounts were blocked, and not WP:A10 as there is technically content, only it is likely copyvio. And there's still skeleton content (although A10-eligible) that's not copyvio, so it can't be bulk WP:G12 either. So ideally the copyvio should first be verified and removed before it can be A10. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:46, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! The best way is to start by looking for reliable sources with the information you wish to add – ideally, something that can be accessed like an online newspaper, although a source that is paywalled or offline can work too. Things like blogs or social media posts, where there is no verification beyond the person writing it, are usually not considered reliable. Once you have a source, you can cite it in the article. Help:Referencing for beginners and/or Help:Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor/2 (depending on the wiki editor you use) will have more detailed information on how to do it! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 22:08, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to the 2025 WikiCup!
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2025 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor, we hope the WikiCup will give you a chance to improve your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page.
For the 2025 WikiCup, we've implemented several changes to the scoring system. The highest-ranking contestants will now receive tournament points at the end of each round, and final rankings are decided by the number of tournament points each contestant has. If you're busy and can't sign up in January, don't worry: Signups are now open throughout the year. To make things fairer for latecomers, the lowest-scoring contestants will no longer be eliminated at the end of each round.
@Emmanuel Kwabi Agyei Hello! Wikipedia talk pages are usually not for general questions about the topic, so it is unlikely that this is the best place for you to find answers. In this case, you can instead find the main application page here and the list of requirements here on Kenyon's website. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:51, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Larry omorr Hi! To add a clarification to what @UtherSRG said, creating a user page is not the same as creating an article! For your userpage, you can just write a short profile to introduce yourself and your goals on Wikipedia. There are even userboxes you can add to decorate your page, with anything from what hobbies you have or what languages you speak to what wikiprojects you'd want to join. Only thing is, it shouldn't look too much like a resume or like you're trying to promote yourself or a website/product, but otherwise it's a lot more flexible than writing an actual Wikipedia article!However, Wikipedia is not a social networking site, and creating a user page is not an end goal of the website – it is best to keep in mind that our main objective here is that encyclopedia thing, even if having user pages can still be helpful to introduces ourselves. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good morning! I have a random question. I’m looking at suggested articles to edit on my homepage, these are proposed by Wikipedia. I’ve noticed that a lot of these articles don’t have a notable subject matter. They don’t pass the notoriety test and the sources used are basically junk - is this normal? I’m proposing to delete a lot of these articles because of this. How is it that these articles were published on the platform in the first place? Will the community be mad at me that I’m proposing to delete? Should I focus on something else? Thanks in advance for your advice. Regards. --Mamani1990 (talk) 13:25, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Mamani1990 Hello! Happy to be able to help with this question! There are usually three processes to delete an article: Wikipedia:Speedy deletion, Wikipedia:Proposed deletion and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. The first one is only for very obvious cases (like empty/nonsensical pages, hoaxes, blatant advertising or copyright violations), while the second one is to propose an uncontested deletion, can only be added once and can be removed by anyone. I see you have proposed Teju Babyface for deletion, but the talk page indicates that it has already been proposed once, so this isn't the ideal course of action.Usually, if the page is reasonably old and you think it doesn't meet the notability criteria, your best bet is the third option (Articles for deletion), which will open a 7-day discussion over whether to delete the page or not. This can be semi-automated with a user script, Twinkle, which makes the technical part of it very easy.It's always a good thing to see new editors learning about things like source quality and notability criteria, although, while you are still learning, it can be good to only nominate a few articles for deletion at first to see how they go. Also, looking around for sources yourself before nominating an article for deletion is recommended, although it isn't mandatory. Good luck! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:18, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again dear mentor, I have another newbie question. I got my first taste of patrolling the "Recent changes" using Twinkle yesterday, and I quite frankly love it. I really had no idea the amount of BS that patrollers have to put up with. My question is, when I'm un-doing vandalism and warning the users in question, these actions trigger that those articles and users end up in my watchlist - I don't want this. Is there a way to stop Wiki automatically adding things to my watch list when I patrol recent changes? I have articles in my watch list that I care about and it's making it hard to decipher them when I constantly need to manually remove the articles I patrolled. Any tip is appreciated. Thank you! Enjoy your day. --Mamani1990 (talk) 13:17, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Mamani1990 Hi! You have access to a personal Twinkle configuration panel at Wikipedia:Twinkle/Preferences. For each task, you can select how long you wish for pages to remain in your watchlist, and there is of course a "Don't add to watchlist" option. Good luck with Twinkle, and happy to see that you're learning fast! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:14, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This award is given in recognition to Chaotic Enby for conducting 936 article reviews in 2024. Thank you so much for all your excellent work. Keep it up! Hey man im josh (talk) 18:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am hopeful that the editing of the article with multiple additional sources will satisfy your concerns regarding Pure Hockey. U193581 (talk) 16:57, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Mamani1990 Hi! Great to see you being bold! As a tip, WP:IMDB is not considered reliable, as it is pretty much fully user-generated. MWFwiki gave you some good advice, although I'll add something important that is not immediately obvious: barring extreme cases, deletion discussions only focus around notability, so problems like article quality or COI editing do not usually weigh in the decision to delete or keep. For the extreme cases (where the page is pretty much impossible to salvage in its current state), WP:TNT does of course apply (and sometimes WP:G5, in cases like a previously blocked paid editing ring). All in all, you're doing pretty great! Agree with your comment that it's good to be as clear as possible in your opening statement, so you don't need to add follow-up comments to clarify it. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:05, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For your second nomination, agree that this could pretty much just be covered in the main Nigeria-wide article. While states can have independent legislations, and Northern Nigeria used to have a separate administration, it isn't really a coherent political unit anymore, and the article is just a collection of "X state did this, Y state did that", without a coherent thread connecting the policies of Northern states together and making it an encyclopedic topic. I'm not commenting on the AfD itself (to avoid canvassing issues), but it is definitely a good AfD (an alternative could have been proposing a merge into the broader article). Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 18:10, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Notsayingmyname Hi! No worries, it really wasn't a big deal and you were trying to help! It's just that it was a Wikipedia:Good article so we have to be extra careful with adding info, and the content in the lead (where you added it) has to be sourced in the article itself. Sorry if I sounded a little bit too harsh, and happy new editing year! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:26, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Louis130659$ Hello! Wikipedia talk pages are not the best place to ask general question about the subject. On Talk:House sitting, you may find people talking about how to improve the article House sitting, rather than asking where to find house sitters. Wikipedia mentor questions work in the same way, although with a wider scope – you can ask me pretty much anything about Wikipedia, but I might not be of much help for finding unrelated services. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:58, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Question from NetCMarketing (21:02, 16 January 2025)
Do not make edits directly on the article about your company (or about their clients, assuming you are employed by a marketing firm), but make edit requests on the talk page instead
Keep the proposed edits as neutral as possible (in this case, a change of logo should be okay)
Be fully transparent about the fact that you are making this edit request on behalf of your company, as part of your job duties
Have a username that is individual: Wikipedia doesn't allow "company accounts", you should ask for a rename to either of:
A personal username
A username of the form "John at NetCentrics" (but not "Marketing at NetCentrics", which identifies your job title rather than you individually)
Another important point about uploading the logo itself: you should ask your company whether the logo is released under a specific license, or below the threshold of originality. If it is either below the threshold of originality or under a license is compatible with CC BY-SA, you can upload it on Wikimedia Commons and ask for it to be added to the article. Otherwise, you should upload it locally (on the English Wikipedia) under a non-free content rationale. Our policy about hosting non-free content is a legal matter, which is why you should be especially careful to make sure that part is done correctly. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:15, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Chaotic Enby, hope you're well. I've got a random question here. When I'm patrolling for vandalism, and I spot a vandal through a diff, when I go to hit "restore a previous version", the diff page goes right to the article in question and shows me the revert - even though I've selected in my Twinkle preferences not to do that. I've also selected to automatically open the user's talk page after I hit revert so I can give a warning, but this never happens. I have to go back to the recent changes, and open a new diff screen again. I've cleared my cache and cookies but it doesn't help. Ideally, I would like to be able to do everything from one screen: revert & warn the user in question, instead of having to open up 2 of the same diff screen, if you get what I'm saying. I see there are other tools for extended confirm users, so maybe I should just wait for that? Thanks in advance. --m aMANÍ1990 🌵 (talk | contribs)13:26, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Mamani1990 Hi! Another tool (which is also available even for non-EC users) is Wikipedia:RedWarn, which I use more often than Twinkle to revert vandalism. While Twinkle has a lot of other neat functionalities, RedWarn is more practical for reverting vandalism as it opens a pop-up window that allows you to do everything without going to another page. And hey, this userbox doesn't exist for no reason!That should at least take care of not having to go to the user talk page, although the other issue you mention (of showing you the revert again) might still be a thing if you don't have the rollback permission (which is pretty easy to obtain once you have patrolled for vandalism and consistently warned users for around a month). The main reason that it's a thing is to have newer patrollers double-check their reverts instead of being able to do everything in one click (and slow down potential vandals using them to quickly undo constructive edits), although I'm personally not super sold on it being necessary, and wouldn't be opposed to the one-click functionality being available to everyone. My bad, I double-checked, and Twinkle and RedWarn still have rollback-like functionalities and I don't think the two-step thing is an intended feature rather than a bug – if anything, that's one more reason for "official" rollback permissions being a silly restriction. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 16:21, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Mamani1990 You're welcome! Twinkle still has many other functionalities that RW doesn't (like being able to nominate articles for AfD, or tag them with maintenance banners), but RW is more practical for the vandalism part. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:02, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A goat for you!
Thanks for the solid tip about Redwarn. Apparently, we can offer goats. Cheers!!
Hi! I thought I'd better ask here and not clog up the original page - do you know how to request CU after the SPI page is submitted? I've looked over the whole thing in source edit view and can't find it for the life of me! Blue Sonnet (talk) 19:24, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey! Thank you so much for assisting in the mini-backlog crush at the backend of the NPP queue, to review all the existing articles pre-2024! Those pages were tricky to deal with, so thank you for the time and care you put in to diligently review these pages! Utopes(talk / cont)03:21, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No worries! As it happened, the final few pages were the toughest of them all (from my POV), and I don't think I would've had the confidence to act on the final few alone 😅. So thank you for stepping in when you did to take a look! Utopes(talk / cont)03:26, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draft:Trump_Meme
What title should we use? $TRUMP or Trump Meme coin... I'm confused. I checked the topic and seems to pass GNG. But is it appropiate to publish this under current title? ☮️Counter-Strike:Mention 269🕉️(🗨️ ● ✉️ ● 📔)05:41, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm publishing it now, but please tell me what appropiate title we should use. ☮️Counter-Strike:Mention 269🕉️(🗨️ ● ✉️ ● 📔)05:43, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@CSMention269 Thanks! Both look like they're used in reliable sources – $TRUMP might be a bit more prevalent, but Trump Meme has the advantage of not being in all-caps and not having a special character that might cause unexpected technical issues. Okay with either, although, with the duplicate creation and the current AfD, we'll probably have to wait for it to be sorted out if we want to go for a RM. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 16:39, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Question from Imacoolguy84 (23:40, 19 January 2025)
@Imacoolguy84 Hi! The first step is to look for sources, which you'll use as the basis to write your article. Usually, you'd want sources that are secondary and independent, with enough coverage to write a solid article. To make sure your sources are reliable, you can look them up here, here and here (the last one is the most complete, but the hardest to search in as it has all the archived discussions about the sources). Wikipedia:42 is a good criterion to know if you have enough to write an article (what Wikipedia calls "notability", but which is closer to "having enough material in sources" than to what people usually understand as notability).Once you have the sources, writing the article is pretty easy – write the information you find in the sources, without direct copying or close paraphrasing for copyright reasons. You can add references to the sources you used after each paragraph (or, if you used multiple sources in a single paragraph, you can be more fine-grained with it). For your first articles, you can write them as drafts and submit them through Articles for Creation for a reviewer to look at them.Wikipedia:Your first article has more advice if you are still curious! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:52, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Tom Englert tag
Thanks for flagging the tone. I edited the line about being the largest retailer, as that status may not be true today. I left the part about expansion and growth because the company grew while he was CEO according to multiple sources. Fairwin99 (talk) 16:18, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey hi,
I have doubts. I want to add my website page link to a Wikipedia-related topic, but when I am adding it, its rejected. So, please let me know how to do it. --Samirsingh9921 (talk) 05:31, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Chaotic Enby. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_cropped.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
